Warp wrote:
>   "This is not a mathematical formula. This is using a mathematical formula
> for a specific purpose. (Just because this is basically the *only* purpose
> for which the formula can be used is irrelevant.)"

Why would you assert it's the only use for that mathematical formula?

If you patent the same formula for a different use, then both patents are 
valid and neither conflicts with the other.

You're working hard to make it not make sense, when in practice, the 
difference between "a mathematical formula" and "a mathematical formula 
applied a particular algorithm for a particular goal" is a well-understood 
difference.

If your mathematical formula is so specific that it's literally impossible 
to use it for any other purpose, then it's an algorithm to achieve a 
specific goal and no longer a mathematical formula.

(Note that the LZW patent doesn't even have a formula in it, so it's not 
really a good example of patenting a mathematical formula.)

>   In other words, they are getting around the restriction by playing with
> words and terms. The end result is still exactly the same: The math formula
> has been patented.

No. Really. It hasn't.  You can use that formula to draw pretty pictures, 
for example, and they have no patent on that.

>   (Good thing the LZW patent expired years ago, btw. No need to worry anymore
> about making your programs support GIF and whatever.)

Yep. And the RSA patent.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Insanity is a small city on the western
   border of the State of Mind.

Post a reply to this message